> atul.seth Wrote:
> > I am very interested to seek a line of
> > confirmation from you whether the Pyramid texts
> > make any reference to meditation.
> > The science of meditation is naturally designed
> > shut down the sensory faculties and make
> > with the underlying reality by achieving a
> > of resonance in the mind field.The mind is
> > 'stilled' by temporary shutdown of the senses.
> > When it is 'stilled" the underlying universal
> > energy field induces the mind to resonate with
> > At this stage, what one meditates on whether
> > visual or sound, information transfer
> > place thru resonance and we understand it. This
> > one of the meaning & objective of meditation.
> I tend to get in the habit of thinking of the
> ancients as animals and this is not only incorrect
> but it would be just as insulting to them as
> thinking of them as stinky footed bumpkins as
> Egyptology does. We are a force of our own
> knowledge whether derived indirectly from ancient
> science as religion or indirectly from reality
> itself as modern science. The ancients were a
> force of nature and an arm of nature itself. We
> don't care about the future past the next
> quarterly results or the next election but they
> were virtually obsessed by the success of the
> species. We don't care about history except to
> know there were an infinite number of stinky
> footed cultures dragging stones up an infinite
> number of ramps. They were intimately familiar
> with 40,000 years of human history as recorded in
> the stars themselves. It's their relationship
> with the present, consciousness, which is somewhat
> enigmatic. It is difficult to see what their
> thinking was like from our perspective.
> Meditation and its benefits likely arise
> principally from complex knowledge which is caused
> by complex language. Animals have relatively
> little neeed for meditation because they have
> relatively little complex knowledge to sort out by
> thought (probably). But ancient man had a great
> deal of knowledge so it would seem meditation
> would be required. Part of understanding nature
> was to understand man. This is greatly
> complicated however by the fact that ancient man
> coundn't understand the nature of language and
> human progress. We can't see it but they couldn't
> understand it because they had a "natural
> language" and couldn't experience thinking in it.
> They even said as much when they said "thot had no
> mother". That is that human progress had no
> feminine cause. The feminine cause, of course, in
> their language was "language". We can understanbd
> the concept of language causing human progress,
> but most tend to reject it in favor of religion,
> science, trial and error, intelligence, opposable
> thumbs, or some other less defined causation. The
> reality is now and always has been that progress
> is caused by the ideas of individuals expressed in
> (by) language. Indeed, this applies to all
> animals and likely all life.
> It's quite apparent from the rituals we call the
> Pyramid Texts that they had a consciousness and
> thhat they were aware of it. This leads
> inexhoribly to meditation. That their knowledge
> was complex suggests different types and levels of
> such thought. That they were closely attuned to
> their nature and their senses suggests that they
> attained some rather deep understanding in some
> areas. Unfortunately either the PT is mute on
> most of this or I've not observed it. There are
> some tantalyzing lines suggesting they were well
> aware oif their thought processes if not the mode
> of their thinking.
> 232a. It is he who is come against N., (though) N.
> does not go against him;
> 232b. the second moment after he saw N., the
> second moment after he perceived N.
> That an agent reacts a "second moment after
> perception" clearly is a vulgar expression for
> the suppression or abeyance of the "natural
> phenomenon of instinct". The fact is that animal
> behavior is usually instinctive so if humans had
> to specifically exclude the concept of "instinct"
> in communication then they were hardly animal-like
> all the time. I believe that when we talk
> principally as a function of habit or to merely
> pass the time the activity is largely on the level
> of "instinct". A person talking on a cell phone
> will usually slam on the brakes right before
> plowing into something as instinct. Their speech
> required a great deal more thought to compose and
> understand but they'd still have memorized and
> habitual speech patterns and some sloppy listening
> Much of this is simply going to be have to put
> together through further deduction and discovery
> of more referents. There's a tremendous amount of
> work to do here just to identify what of Sanscrit
> and other ancient writing is directly or
> indirectly related to ancient science/ language.
> I believe that even with the information currently
> available that ancient thinking and language can
> be reassembled but before we can evenachieve this
> the writing will provide clues to vastly more and
> vastly more important source materials and that
> modern science can find data that will help soirt
> everything out.
> This might not happen as long as there "exist" an
> infinite number of ramps.
I think ancient science represents advanced knowledge that was confined to a closed select group in every ancient civilization. The level of understanding of the science resulted in creation of “technology” that was utilized for the progress and development of the civilization in all aspects of life. This ancient science was encoded and preserved in the ancient natural language with its specific phonetic alphabet and there was a simpler language for the other members of civilization. Some/All alphabets may have been borrowed over a period of time but the meaning of words was essentially quite different. The problem is we are trying to understand these ancient scientific texts using the meaning as understood from common language usage. We need the original ancient language dictionary but are using the common language dictionary. This was due to superiority complex among the principal researchers in 18-19th century who refused to consider any notions of “advanced science and technology” in remote antiquity across the globe and the trend or legacy continued. Interestingly, this stance is aligned with the Darwinian principle of Evolution.
I agree we need the source technical materials or a clue to the logic of construction of the ancient original phonetic/sign alphabet and yes later commentaries/translations can only help us climb a few ramps.
Meditation is an ancient scientific rigorous technique to communicate with nature directly without use of sensory faculties. It is a means to understand and also source of complex knowledge. This is the reason a select group evolved having a corpus of complex knowledge and who had knowledge of this tool. It must be noted that meditation referred here is completely different from the commercially available “get well-stress buster-holistic life course’s”. The ancient technique is too demanding and very complicated for common people to practice. It is the culmination, the closing phase of Yoga and is yet much more in scope and depth. This site has excellent concise technical commentary on Patanjalis Yoga sutras here.
I have doubts, for Modern science is yet to understand the nature of empty space and a precise standalone physical definition does not exist. A workaround mathematical definition “Space-Time” has been invented in relativity. Empty Space or Nu (?) is one of the main keys that unlock the door to ancient mysteries. Space is everything for without it, there is no existence.We are essentially 99.9% empty space.